William Shakespeare’s timeless revenge tragedy “Hamlet” (1601) transcends contextual barriers through its depiction of the irresolute eponymous protagonist’s disillusionment with his surroundings and his ensuing introspective conflict. Through a confronting portrayal of loyalty and betrayal resulting in the decay of political hierarchy, responders witness the transition of Hamlet’s psychological state in the duration of the honourable avenging of his father’s regicide. As his characterisation is one of a Christian humanist in a transitionary Elizabethan context, evidenced through his status as a scholar of Wittenberg University, Hamlet naturally inquires into perennial concerns regarding the human condition.
Try not to give any textual references away in the introduction; its just a structurally inappropriate thing to do. It is through his numerous revealing soliloquies that his consequent disillusionment with the human condition in the microcosmic Denmark is best dramatically expressed. Overall, the universal themes of the elusive nature of truth, death and decay, deception and action as opposed to inaction collectively serve to uphold the status of Hamlet as an atypical Senecan revenge tragedy that endures through the ages.
Whoa, bloody brilliant introduction here! Step back 
My suggestion would be that starting with an introduction of the text may resolve your response to being text based. Now this is a subtle thing, but essentially, you don't want your response to focus on the TEXT per say, you want it to focus on the TEXT AS A REPRESENTATION of some big idea, in your case, struggle and disillusionment and the human condition. Try (if you feel inclined, this intro is great already) starting your intro with some overarching statement about this BIG IDEA, and only then introduce Hamlet. This makes your response more conceptually driven, which is a plus. I'm happy to go into this a little more, it's a very subtle difference, let me know!Shakespeare’s “Hamlet” and its central theme of death and decay, as explored by the Christian humanistic eponymous protagonist, perpetuates his internal conflict between action and inaction in the search for elusive truths. The unnatural nature of Old Hamlet’s regicide by the disloyal Claudius leads Hamlet to an intrinsic questioning of the human condition. Hamlet utilises the microcosmic Elsinor to philosophise about the corruption of Denmark and Elizabethan society as a whole through such imagery of decay as “‘tis an unweeded garden”. In using the metaphor, he implies the moral illegitimacy of the ruler, as mirrored in Hamlet’s mythological allusions in depicting Claudius as a bestial “satyr” in contrast to the Sun-God “Hyperion” to describe his father.
This is superb analysis, however, your focus is on Hamlet. Remember, it is Shakespeare who makes these representational choices, any meaning garnered from the text must be attributed to him and his REPRESENTATION of Hamlet. Hamlet, the character himself, is merely a vessel. Again, very subtle, but very important. This antithesis of heaven and earth mirrors the notion of the Elizabethan World Order and great chain of being, where Hamlet utilises his scholarly discourse gained as a Wittenberg student to deliberately undermine Claudius’ value and discredit his legitimacy as king. In his opening soliloquy, the disruption of hierarchical order clearly impacts heavily upon the psyche of Hamlet, whom wishes he could commit suicide out of grief (“O that this too too solid flesh would melt”). Owing to his Christian humanist nature however, he cannot act as “The Everlasting had not fix'd his canon ‘gainst self-slaughter”, employing a religious allusion to disclose the conflict raised by doctrinal adherence in a Post-Reformation context. Hamlet further curses his inaction in avenging his father’s “foul and most unnatural murder” in his self-deprecatory soliloquy “O what a rogue and peasant slave am I!” in which he ponders “Am I a coward?”. Evidently, he is torn between action and inaction in a morally corrupt society, unsure whether the apparition of his father was from “heaven” or “hell”, and unwilling to act until he can “catch the conscience of the king”, pursuant to his humanist nature.
These last few sentences have slipped ever so slightly into textual retell, that is, simply explaining what happened in the text. You can tell even from the highlighting, there is a massive patch of yellow with no green! You follow with something a little more conceptual, but it is not quite enough. Focus instead not on a retell of the scene, but on what IDEAS have been communicated in the scene. EG - "Shakespeare's representation of Hamlet's self-deprecatory soliloquy is a clear commentary on the dichotomy of action and inaction, as the audience comes to realise that ______." See how I'm not actually describing the scenes themselves, just using them as evidence to show what idea Shakespeare is portraying. in Act X Critic A.C. Bradley supports this view through explaining that “These obstacles would not suffice to prevent Hamlet from acting, if his state was normal”, once more displaying the decay of the state as the impetus for Hamlet’s inaction.
Cool use of critic, very nice. Plagued by uncertainty, it is evident that death and decay spark inner conflict as Hamlet attempts to honourably avenge his father’s death.
The conclusion is again evidence that the focus has slipped away from Shakespeare. Hamlet, again, is just Shakespeare's mechanism/puppet.Through exemplifying intellectual ponderings perpetuated by a Christian humanist, Hamlet further unveils his introspective struggle between the intrinsic aspects of life, death and their consequences following his experiences of disillusionment and deception.
Beautiful, but again, Shakespeare! Act 3 of the play solidifies Hamlet’s resolve, wherein his purpose of using the metatheatrical mouse trap play “The Murder of Gonzago” “To catch the conscience of the king” is crystallised. Hamlet’s existential contemplation in his timeless soliloquy “To be or not to be” exemplifies the universal, timeless status of the play through a reflection upon the unknown nature of death and questioning of nobility. Hamlet ponders upon the continued elusive nature of truth through the metaphorical likening of death to a dream “which no one wakes up from”, emphasising the unknowability of death. The further contemplation on “Whether tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune” displays through paradox the suffering of his conscience resulting from his disillusionment with Claudius’ murder. Moreover, it references medieval conventions of chivalry through his concern over whether his actions are noble.
This is better, focusing on what the techniques DO rather than what actually occurs in the play. The consequences of death are further highlighted through the pragmatic, oxymoronic discourse of Claudius. The atypical Machiavellian villain subverts the archetypal antagonist through providing the audience with an examination of his conscience in fully admitting to murder, confessing through biblical allusion “My offence is rank, it smells to heaven”. He proves himself to be an efficient but scheming leader, mirroring Nicolo Machiavelli’s virtues of “a fox’s cunningness” wherein he is a catalyst for Hamlet’s disillusionment through the regicide of Old Hamlet and continued plotting against the protagonist. This is dramatically ironic as Hamlet himself deceives Claudius through the intelligent use of the metatheatrical mousetrap play.and his antic disposition, in which he confesses to his mother that he “essentially [is] not in madness, but in craft”.
Slipping ever so slightly into retell once again, what do these things tell us as an audience, and/or what do they show about life and death? Evidently, the status of Hamlet as a Christian humanist results in the prolonging of the central act of revenge through existential questioning and deception.
The intimate ties between death and revenge initiate a shift in the psychological development of Hamlet through his disillusionment with death and subsequent adoption of a fatalist perspective. Hamlet loses his moral high ground in his quest for revenge following the accidental killing of Polonius. His continued disillusionment with surrounding characters once more presents itself wherein he convinces Gertrude not to disclose his murder, revealing misogynistic tendencies in his lecturing tone “Confess yourself to heaven, Repent what’s past, avoid what’s to come”. A turning point however is finally reached following his meeting with the Polish army, whose leader Fortinbras serves as the perfect dramatic foil for Hamlet’s irresolute character as despite sharing the parallel of revenge, Fortinbras being impulsive whereas Hamlet being contemplative.
What does this show? What do we as an audience learn? Showing an acceptance of death through the alliteration “death and danger dare”, Hamlet finally concludes on a course of action in stating “My thoughts be bloody or be nothing worth”, foreshadowing the play’s violent conclusion. The perennial elusivity of truth is finally accepted here by Hamlet, who realises that the only certainty is death. Kenneth Branagh’s 1996 film depicts Hamlet holding a skull, symbolising the epiphanic moment of realisation of vanitas, that all are equal in death. The absurdist elements seen through the stage direction “Throws up skull” serve as a point of psychological change from Christian humanism to fatalism as Hamlet becomes disillusioned with death through making light of morbid concepts.
I think that you can just describe the stage direction and what is accomplishes, the quote may be unnecessary? It works though, so personal preference 
This notion of fate elucidated from Hamlet’s inquisitive humanist actions mirror the play’s status as a Senecan revenge tragedy in Shakespeare’s complex portrayal of fate and predestination through the certainty of death.
Hamlet’s humanist nature further prevails in his parallel with the mythological character Hercules, whom he alludes to in his soliloquy “No more like my father, Than I to Hercules”. Much akin to Hamlet, Hercules killed his teacher out of frustration and never became king, as his scheming relative Eurystheus became king in his place. Over the course of the play, Hamlet clearly aligns himself with the image of the violent Hercules, stating that he is God’s “scourge and minister”.
What additional meaning does an audience member who knows about Hercules gain from this character allusion? Hamlet’s psyche evolves to the point where his rage results in an outburst to Horatio “and is't not to be damn'd,To let this canker of our nature come In further evil?” Hamlet eventually completes the process of externalizing his own self-hatred, no longer seeing flaws in himself, but instead other people as embodiments of those flaws. Whilst reassuring himself, this has disastrous implications for the supporting characters. Critic Wilson Knight supports such an interpretation through his view of Hamlet as “The walking ambassador of death walking amid life”, spreading the effects of his father’s unnatural regicide amongst those of the state “like a blighting disease” which “undermines the health of the state”. He describes Hamlet as “inhuman” as he “believes in nothing, not even himself, except the memory of a ghost”. Moreover, the use of colour symbolism is seen as “His black robed presence (“inky cloak”) is a reminder to everyone of the fact of death”. In summary, through an acceptance of death, as mirrored through the recurring concept of memento mori, Hamlet becomes disillusioned with the idea in his psychological shift toward fatalism.
In conclusion, Hamlet’s unique portrayal of a protagonist plagued by an introspective struggle between action and inaction, pursuant to his contextualisation as a Christian humanist, serves to immortalise the play as one that transcends contextual barriers. Through a dramatic portrayal of struggle as a consequence of disillusionment, the play’s central themes continue to preserve Shakespeare’s Senecan revenge tragedy as a distinctive text that resonates with audiences worldwide.
A great, succinct conclusion.
Home
Help
Search
Login
Topic: English Advanced Essay Marking (Modules Only) (Read 723874 times)